MENU

baptism
Tag Archive

On October 20, 2023 By In Culture

What Baptism Does

Image courtesy pexels.com

Many Christians have thought very little about baptism and its significance in their experience of salvation. If they think of baptism at all, it may be only as a personal decision they made to get baptized or in terms of what they think baptism does not mean or accomplish. The Westminster Confession of Faith says:

Baptism is a sacrament of the new testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible church; but also, to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.

WCF 28.1

Baptism makes a person a member of the church (1Cor. 12:13). It is a formal rite, conferring actual membership in the Body of Christ. The person baptized may choose to neglect that membership or abandon it later in life. He may become an unbeliever and apostate, but he can never be a non-Christian.

Baptism is a sign and seal that a person has been united to Christ (Gal. 3:27). It certifies that a person has been grafted into Christ, made part of the covenant of grace, and now partakes of the vine. The baptized person may neglect that union or decide to renounce it later in life. He may be cut off from Christ due to unfruitfulness or fall from grace. But he must be connected to Christ before he can be severed from him. He must be a partaker of grace before he can fall away from it. He is connected to Christ in his baptism.

Baptism is a sign and seal that a person has been regenerated (Tit. 3:5). We know that a person may be outwardly baptized and yet remain inwardly unregenerate. Simon the sorcerer was. But the person who is baptized is part of the regeneration (Matt. 19:28) and shares in the resurrected Israel (Ezek. 37:1-14). He may go on living according to the old man of sin. He may reject the resurrection life which we are offered in Christ. But his baptism will forever testify that the new creation has begun.

Baptism is a sign and seal that one’s sins are forgiven (Acts 2:38). It is a symbolic washing which cleanses our souls and saves us from the judgment to come (1Pet. 3:21-22). The person baptized may choose to walk in unbelief and unrepentance, just as Israel did after they were baptized in the Red Sea, and if he does so, then his sins will not be pardoned. But baptism is a visible sign of God’s promise that our sins are forgiven and that God will remember his promises and not our transgressions on the day of judgment.

Baptism is a sign and seal of a covenant obligation (Rom. 6:3-4). The baptized person no longer belongs to himself. He has died with Christ to sin and been raised with Christ to live in obedience for the glory of God. He may choose to forsake that covenant obligation—he may be unfaithful to it—but he cannot deny that he is so obligated. A person does not choose the nation of his birth, but he is subject to its laws as a citizen nonetheless. So too, the person baptized is forever obligated to life under God’s covenant grace and the law of Christ.

Let us not forget or neglect the significance of our own baptism but be deliberately mindful of what it says to us and about us. Improve your baptism, not by doing it over and over again, but by meditating upon its truth, goodness, and beauty, and endeavoring to live in light of it.

Read more

On August 19, 2022 By In Church, Theology

Does Romans 6 require submersion baptism?

In Romans 6:3-4, Paul says, “Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”

Does this passage require submersion as the proper mode of baptism? I was baptized by submersion and believe that submersions are legitimate baptisms, but my church practices baptisms from above (sprinkling or pouring). We believe this mode lines up best with biblical commands and imagery.

Submersionists appeal to Romans 6 as proof that baptisms must be done by submersion. The thinking goes like this: If baptism represents the death and burial of Jesus, then the recipient must go completely under water, similar to being buried underground. They think that the visual component of baptism must symbolize a visual burial. But there are problems with this argument.

(more…)

Read more

On December 1, 2021 By In Culture

My Baptist Obstacles: Did Circumcision Come from a Works-Based Religion?

Continuity Over Replacement

The waterfall above shows water moving from one level of land to another, but the water is continuous – the same water. Some things are different about the Old and New Testaments, but salvation and grace are not part of those things. Salvation and Grace are a constant – a continuity. What does this have to do with baptism?

One thing that held me back from understanding baptism was my complete misunderstanding of the Old Testament – I misunderstood salvation, I misunderstood the reason for Jewish markers like the law and circumcision – I thought circumcision was part of a works based religion. So it was hard for me to hear any connections between baptism and circumcision. But I was wrong.

This week I will discuss the gracious, non-works based salvation of the Old Testament. Next week I will discuss the salvation of Gentiles in the Old Testament and the reason circumcision was only for Jews.

So let’s find out whether circumcision came from a works based religion. Without further ado, let’s back up to my late childhood:

One year when I was youngish, after my father pen-marked my height in the paint of a hall doorway, I remember having a child’s epiphany. I remember working over a specific deep though while I looked at the ink line on the jamb up close to my eyes. It wasn’t about ink or height; it was about Christians being the true Jews. I ran to tell my parents: Jesus was a Jew. God had “started” Christianity from the truest teacher of the Jews – Jesus. That meant that our religion, Christianity was the faithful continuation of God’s true religion. We had the true Judaism, and it was they who had rejected Jesus who had left.

I admit that I was under-informed at that age about the complexities of the situation.

(more…)

Read more

On June 5, 2018 By In Theology

Water, Spirit, Fire, pt. 3

In the previous essay, we saw that fire is a work of the Holy Spirit. The two are related so closely that they cannot be separated. Now we turn our attention to the Spirit’s relationship to water. Many have understood Spirit baptism to be a dry baptism, one that is of a spiritual nature only. John the Baptist does set up a contrast between himself and Jesus: John baptizes with water but Jesus will baptize “with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:16).

This is interpreted to mean that Jesus will baptize with the Spirit and fire and nothing else. James Dunn maintains that the Greek baptizo [to baptize] does not specify water as the element of baptism, and that its use in relation to Spirit baptism is “obviously a metaphor.” Spirit baptism does not refer to any performed ritual. Dunn goes so far as to say that baptizo isn’t an essential description of Spirit baptism and that “other metaphors might just as well have been used.”[1] He continues:

He [John] certainly gives no indication that he thought the latter [Spirit and fire baptism] was a form of water baptism, or involved such. The assumption must be that he too took it merely as a metaphor…Water is set over against Spirit as that which distinguishes John’s baptism from the future baptism…Christ’s baptism will not be in water but in Spirit and fire.[2]

Dunn’s view is common among baptistic and charismatic Christians, whereas sacramental Christians see water baptism and Spirit baptism as two sides of the same coin. They are linked together so closely that it may be said, “Water baptism is Spirit baptism.” Scripturally, both positions have strengths and weaknesses. When mining the book of Acts, Dunn’s position appears to have the upper hand. The baptism of the Spirit sometimes occurs before water baptism or after an additional ritual, the laying on of hands. At the very least, one would not conclude that Spirit and water necessarily function together. (more…)

Read more

On May 29, 2018 By In Theology

Water, Spirit, Fire, pt. 2

In the introduction we saw that Matthew and Luke are the only gospels which include “fire” in John the Baptist’s narrative. If Matthew and Luke are the priestly and prophetic gospels, the inclusion of fire is of great importance. Priests are servants of the altar, working with fire every day. They were to keep the fire burning day in and day out (Leviticus 6:9, 12-13). Their primary duty was sacrificial worship, which included placing offerings into the fire (Leviticus 1:7-9). This fire may have also been used to put men to death (Leviticus 20:14, 21:9).

Prophets, too, are associated with fire. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel employ the use of fire more times than any other book of the Bible. Elijah is perhaps our greatest prophetic example, considering he and John the Baptist are closely associated in the gospels. Elijah calls fire down from heaven, once upon the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18:24-40) and again upon the captains of Ahaziah (2 Kings 1:9-18). Now John prophesies a similar judgment (Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:17). John functions as a new Elijah, warning unfaithful Israel of impending doom. Elijah called upon YHWH to bring fire down from heaven; John calls upon YHWH incarnate to do the same.

Fire is not always a picture of judgment, however. Fire is often a source of blessing and the presence of God himself. He appears to Moses at the burning bush and leads Israel by fire at night (Exodus 3:2; 13:21). He descends upon Mount Sinai “in fire” (Exodus 19:18; 24:17). The fire of the altar, mentioned above, was lit by God to show his glory and acceptance of worship (Leviticus 9:23-24; 2 Chronicles 7:1). (more…)

Read more

On May 22, 2018 By In Theology

Water, Spirit, Fire, pt. 1

John the Baptist says, “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me . . . will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11). Much debate surrounds the nature of this statement and what exactly it prophesies. Sacramental, baptistic, and charismatic Christians have differing interpretations when it comes to baptism and the reception of the Holy Spirit.

The objective of this series of essays is to investigate the relationship between water, Spirit, and fire baptism(s). To do so we will explore the following questions: What is the purpose and meaning of baptism by John? What is the purpose of Jesus undergoing baptism by John, and does it relate to Christian baptism in any way? Does the phrase “Spirit and fire” denote one baptism, or does it speak of two? Is Spirit and fire baptism waterless, or is water a necessary element? For our introduction we will begin by reviewing preliminary data from the gospel accounts. (more…)

Read more

On October 21, 2017 By In Culture, Theology

Sola Fide: The Problem With the Sinner’s Prayer

I am a Reformed Protestant, and I don’t believe we are saved by faith alone. Neither do I believe we are “once saved, always saved.” Do those statements seem strange to you? Then you’ve probably fallen prey to one of the great distortions of Protestant and evangelical theology. Read on, and I’ll explain.

Both the material cause of the split between Rome and the Reformers (Sola Fide, or “faith alone”), and the formal cause (Sola Scriptura, or “Scripture alone”), suffer from widespread distortions and misunderstandings, even among Protestants who claim to espouse these principles. As we approach the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, I want to debunk some popular myths about these two of the Five Solae.

The Pseudo-Sacrament of Conversion

Let’s start with Sola Fide, as it’s commonly embodied in evangelical circles: as a sort of confession of guilt and pledge of allegiance to God known as “the sinner’s prayer.” It usually goes something like this: (more…)

Read more

On December 20, 2016 By In Theology, Worship

10 Questions Preachers Should Ask Before Sunday Morning

I have been a pastor for almost a decade. I spend between 12-15 hours each week thinking, researching, and writing before I deliver the first words in my Sunday sermon.a The process of writing my sermon goes through a lengthy journey each week. I contemplate several questions from Monday to Friday which force me to edit and re-edit my manuscript. There is no perfect sermon, but a sermon that goes through revisions and asks import questions has a much better chance of communicating with clarity than the self-assured preacher who engages the sermonic task with nothing more than academic lenses.

I have compiled a list of ten questions I ask myself each week at some point or another.

Question #1: Is this language clear? When you write a manuscript ( as I do) you have an opportunity to carefully consider the language you use. I make a habit of reading my sermon out loud which leads me to realize that certain phrases do not convey the idea clearly. A well-written sermon does not necessarily mean a well-delivered sermon. Reading my sermons out loud causes me to re-write and look for other ways to explain a concept or application more clearly.

Question #2: Is there a need to use high theological language in this sermon? Seminary graduates are often tempted to use the best of their training in the wrong environment. People are not listening to you to hear your theological acumen. I am well aware that some in the congregation would be entirely comfortable with words like perichoresis and Arianism. I am not opposed to using high theological discourse. Words like atonement, justification, sanctification are biblical and need to be defined. But extra-biblical terms and ideologies should be employed sparingly. Much of this can be dealt in a Sunday School class or other environments. High theological language needs to be used with great care, and I think it needs to be avoided as much as possible in the Sunday sermon.

Question #3: Can I make this sermon even shorter? As I read my sermons each week, I find that I can cut a paragraph or two easily, or depending on how long you preach, perhaps an entire page. This is an important lesson for new preachers: not everything needs to be said. Shorter sermons–which I strongly advocateb–force you to say what’s important and keep some of your research in the footnotes where it belongs. Preachers need to learn what to prioritize in a sermon so as not to unload unnecessary information on their parishioners. (more…)

  1. Thankful for great interactions before this article was published. It helped sharpen my points  (back)
  2. By this I mean sermons no longer than 30 minutes  (back)

Read more

On August 8, 2015 By In Scribblings

John Calvin on the Sacraments

John_Calvin_by_Holbein1. After God has once received us into his family, it is not that he may regard us in the light of servants, but of sons, performing the part of a kind and anxious parent, and providing for our maintenance during the whole course of our lives. And, not contented with this, he has been pleased by a pledge to assure us of his continued liberality. To this end, he has given another sacrament to his Church by the hand of his only-begotten Son—viz. a spiritual feast, at which Christ testifies that he himself is living bread (John 6:51), on which our souls feed, for a true and blessed immortality… First, then, the signs are bread and wine, which represent the invisible food which we receive from the body and blood of Christ. For as God, regenerating us in baptism, ingrafts us into the fellowship of his Church, and makes us his by adoption, so we have said that he performs the office of a provident parent, in continually supplying the food by which he may sustain and preserve us in the life to which he has begotten us by his word. Moreover, Christ is the only food of our soul, and, therefore, our heavenly Father invites us to him, that, refreshed by communion with him, we may ever and anon gather new vigour until we reach the heavenly immortality. But as this mystery of the secret union of Christ with believers is incomprehensible by nature, he exhibits its figure and image in visible signs adapted to our capacity, nay, by giving, as it were, earnests and badges, he makes it as certain to us as if it were seen by the eye; the familiarity of the similitude giving it access to minds however dull, and showing that souls are fed by Christ just as the corporeal life is sustained by bread and wine. We now, therefore, understand the end which this mystical benediction has in view—viz. to assure us that the body of Christ was once sacrificed for us, so that we may now eat it, and, eating, feel within ourselves the efficacy of that one sacrifice,—that his blood was once shed for us so as to be our perpetual drink. This is the force of the promise which is added, “Take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you” (Mt. 26:26, &c.). The body which was once offered for our salvation we are enjoined to take and eat, that, while we see ourselves made partakers of it, we may safely conclude that the virtue of that death will be efficacious in us. Hence he terms the cup the covenant in his blood. For the covenant which he once sanctioned by his blood he in a manner renews, or rather continues, in so far as regards the confirmation of our faith, as often as he stretches forth his sacred blood as drink to us.

…
10. The sum is, that the flesh and blood of Christ feed our souls just as bread and wine maintain and support our corporeal life. For there would be no aptitude in the sign, did not our souls find their nourishment in Christ. This could not be, did not Christ truly form one with us, and refresh us by the eating of his flesh, and the drinking of his blood. But though it seems an incredible thing that the flesh of Christ, while at such a distance from us in respect of place, should be food to us, let us remember how far the secret virtue of the Holy Spirit surpasses all our conceptions, and how foolish it is to wish to measure its immensity by our feeble capacity. Therefore, what our mind does not comprehend let faith conceive—viz. that the Spirit truly unites things separated by space. That sacred communion of flesh and blood by which Christ transfuses his life into us, just as if it penetrated our bones and marrow, he testifies and seals in the Supper, and that not by presenting a vain or empty sign, but by there exerting an efficacy of the Spirit by which he fulfils what he promises. And truly the thing there signified he exhibits and offers to all who sit down at that spiritual feast, although it is beneficially received by believers only who receive this great benefit with true faith and heartfelt gratitude. For this reason the apostle said, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ”? (1 Cor. 10:16.) There is no ground to object that the expression is figurative, and gives the sign the name of the thing signified. I admit, indeed, that the breaking of bread is a symbol, not the reality. But this being admitted, we duly infer from the exhibition of the symbol that the thing itself is exhibited. For unless we would charge God with deceit, we will never presume to say that he holds forth an empty symbol. Therefore, if by the breaking of bread the Lord truly represents the partaking of his body, there ought to be no doubt whatever that he truly exhibits and performs it. The rule which the pious ought always to observe is, whenever they see the symbols instituted by the Lord, to think and feel surely persuaded that the truth of the thing signified is also present. For why does the Lord put the symbol of his body into your hands, but just to assure you that you truly partake of him? If this is true let us feel as much assured that the visible sign is given us in seal of an invisible gift as that his body itself is given to us.

11. I hold then (as has always been received in the Church, and is still taught by those who feel aright), that the sacred mystery of the Supper consists of two things—the corporeal signs, which, presented to the eye, represent invisible things in a manner adapted to our weak capacity, and the spiritual truth, which is at once figured and exhibited by the signs. When attempting familiarly to explain its nature, I am accustomed to set down three things—the thing meant, the matter which depends on it, and the virtue or efficacy consequent upon both. The thing meant consists in the promises which are in a manner included in the sign. By the matter, or substance, I mean Christ, with his death and resurrection. By the effect, I understand redemption, justification, sanctification, eternal life, and all other benefits which Christ bestows upon us. Moreover, though all these things have respect to faith, I leave no room for the cavil, that when I say Christ is conceived by faith, I mean that he is only conceived by the intellect and imagination. He is offered by the promises, not that we may stop short at the sight or mere knowledge of him, but that we may enjoy true communion with him. And, indeed, I see not how any one can expect to have redemption and righteousness in the cross of Christ, and life in his death, without trusting first of all to true communion with Christ himself. Those blessings could not reach us, did not Christ previously make himself ours. I say then, that in the mystery of the Supper, by the symbols of bread and wine, Christ, his body and his blood, are truly exhibited to us, that in them he fulfilled all obedience, in order to procure righteousness for us— first that we might become one body with him; and, secondly, that being made partakers of his substance, we might feel the result of this fact in the participation of all his blessings.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Chapter 17, §1 & 10-11 (All the stuff in between is really good too and I would encourage you to read it.)

Read more

On March 18, 2015 By In Books, Politics

New Publication from Kuyperian Press!

Infant Baptism - You and Your Household_smfront

Kuyperian Press is proud to announce the forthcoming publication of Dr. Gregg Strawbridge’s booklet on infant baptism. The Kindle edition will be available in the next coming days in preparation for his debate with Dr. James R. White on the topic on the 23rd of March.

 

Read more